Azure Sphere: Fitting Linux Security in 4 Mib of RAM
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Azure Sphere: Fitting Linux Security in 4 MiB of RAM Ryan Fairfax Principal Software Engineering Lead Microsoft o Intro to Azure Sphere o Kernel Customizations o User mode services / App Model Agenda o Future work / Takeaways © Microsoft Corporation Microcontrollers (MCUs) 9 BILLION new MCU devices built and deployed every year Azure Sphere is an end-to-end solution for MCU powered devices The Azure Sphere OS Azure Sphere Certified MCUs The Azure Sphere Security Service Azure Sphere certified MCUs CONNECTED with built-in networking Microsoft Network Pluton FLASH Security ≥ 4MB Connection WiFi in first chips SECURED with built-in Microsoft silicon Subsystem CONNECTEDsecurity technologywith includingbuilt-in networkingthe Pluton Security Subsystem Firewall Firewall Firewall SECURED with built-in Microsoft silicon security ARM ARM CROSSOVER Cortex-A processing power Cortex-A SRAM Cortex-M technology including the Pluton Security Subsystem optimized for ≥ 4MB for real time brought to MCUs for the first time low power processing CROSSOVER Cortex-A processing power Firewall Firewall Firewall brought to MCUs for the first time Multiplexed I/O GPIO PWM TDM I2S UART I2C SPI ADC © Microsoft Corporation The Azure Sphere OS Azure Sphere OS Architecture Secure Application Containers Compartmentalize code for agility, robustness & security OS App Containers for App Containers for Layer 4 POSIX (on Cortex-A) I/O (on Cortex-Ms) On-chip Cloud Services Provide update, authentication, and connectivity OS On-chip Cloud Services Layer 3 Custom Linux kernel Empowers agile silicon evolution and reuse of code OS HLOS Kernel Layer 2 Security Monitor Guards integrity and access to critical resources OS Security Monitor Layer 1 Hardware Azure Sphere MCUs © Microsoft Corporation Linux Kernel Customizations At the heart of the Azure Sphere OS is the Linux Kernel Azure Sphere OS Architecture • Based on kernel.org sources OS App Containers for App Containers for Layer 4 POSIX (on Cortex-A) I/O (on Cortex-Ms) • Originally 4.1, now 4.9, with the goal to keep moving forward as LTS branches get declared OS On-chip Cloud Services • Upstream releases are merged monthly Layer 3 • We have 227 commits in a branch on top of the upstream OS HLOS Kernel sources as of Aug 16th Layer 2 OS Security Monitor Layer 1 Hardware Azure Sphere MCUs © Microsoft Corporation Linux Kernel Customizations The first challenge was making it fit • The first build was a 4MB kernel, which took up all of the RAM • We moved to Execute-In-Place (XIP) which helped a lot but we still used nearly 4MB of RAM to boot • Lots of our early patches were making things more modular and tuning sizes of caches • Some things were removed to reduce size (sysfs, most memory tracking options, kallsyms). • As of our public preview we’re at ~2.4MB of code + data, ~2100KB RAM usage after boot © Microsoft Corporation Linux Kernel Customizations The first version of our security model used static permissions baked into the filesystem • We set owner, group, SUID, SGID on each process to ensure a consistent identity at runtime via build policy • To pull this off we added some kernel code to enforce effective UID = real UID to avoid getting back to root • Shared data or IPC was done via supplemental groups (also baked into filesystem) • This made effective access for a program easier to reason about, but you had a major burden at build time to ensure the right owners / groups were set © Microsoft Corporation Linux Kernel Customizations The second version involved a simple Linux Security Module • The goals were to reduce attack surface and enable new access control scenarios • The LSM statically fails many operations that aren’t needed on the platform • We add three new fields to each task: App ID (CID), Network ID (TID), Capabilities • Other apps + kernel modules can use these new fields for extended access control • All values are immutable once set and inherit to child processes © Microsoft Corporation Linux Kernel Customizations We experimented a lot with filesystems • We started with CRAMFS + XIP patches, but moved to a fork with modifications to reduce overhead • We patched in CoW support for XIP code when debugging is enabled • We tried many writable file systems that didn’t work out due to RAM or flash wear overhead: ext2, jffs2, yaffs • Ultimately we ported ARM’s LittleFS to the kernel as it was a better fit for writable partitions that are hundreds of KiB in size • https://github.com/ARMmbed/littlefs In some cases we added more access control to existing features • Added per-pin GPIO access to the base GPIO infrastructure as an optional feature • Added file system quota support for MTD devices • Adjusted some items to leverage existing or new capabilities instead of checking for root © Microsoft Corporation User mode / App model Our user mode code execution model focuses around applications • Everything is an app, other than the application manager (aka init). This includes system services. • Apps are self describing, independently updatable, and generally run isolated from each other • There are 4 out of box system apps + an optional debugger Apps are renewable • Everything on the system can be updated over the air • Microsoft manages OS app updates, OEMs manage their app updates © Microsoft Corporation User mode / App model We looked at options for self contained app packages and containers • Looked seriously at LXC but couldn’t get it to fit • We started rolling our own containers with namespaces but found many of the peripherals apps used didn’t interact with namespaces properly or led to capability leakage We ended up with apps as self describing file systems • Each app is its own filesystem that is mounted / unmounted to install / uninstall • Apps contain metadata documents in the root of the FS that describes how they work and what they need access to • The system validates policy and enforces it by leveraging many other Linux technologies © Microsoft Corporation User mode / App model Manifests describe the app • What to run • What policy to enforce • What peripherals to allow access to Our custom init process (application- manager) enforces the policy • Uses cgroups for resource limiting • Assigns each app a unique UID / GID • Updates access on /dev entries • Programs netfilter firewall Every process other than init is an app © Microsoft Corporation User mode / App model Attack surface is reduced by removing features • This not only helps our RAM limits but means one less feature we have to reason about from a security perspective • We have no shell or user account management • No kernel module support • We ship a greatly reduced library set (9 total .so files in /usr/lib) Resource usage is limited • cgroups enables predictable RAM exhaustion and resource contention behavior • An app cannot access any peripherals or network traffic without opting into those features © Microsoft Corporation Future Work Upstream some of our work that is applicable outside our product • Some memory improvements and configuration support are wins for any platform • File system work maybe generally applicable to other classes of embedded devices More namespace usage and further isolation of resources • There’s a lot of security goodness to be had here if we can make it fit Split up some large capability sets like CAP_SYS_ADMIN • The Linux capability model is great until you need CAP_SYS_ADMIN… • Some “low level” hardware features are designed to require ADMIN when not strictly needed Revisit features that were “too big” to fit by refactoring to enable usage with less resources • For example, looking at other LSMs Many, many, more ideas than I can possibly fit on this slide… © Microsoft Corporation Takeaways Security and resources are at odds at times • Features are designed for strong security, space considerations are secondary (if at all) • Security features are often all or nothing – no way to take some benefit without paying for all • Many security features depend on other frameworks like sysfs There’s a lot that works well • Most core Linux features just work even with limited resources • Most of the changes we had to do were small modifications to existing code paths Improvements for the desktop / server space often benefit embedded & IoT as well • The problems in the IoT space are far from unique © Microsoft Corporation Let’s secure the future. © Microsoft Corporation.